Quick Service Restaurant Feasibility Study

The SBA loan record for limited-service restaurant projects nationally and by state, and what a feasibility study for one has to test.

Limited-service restaurant feasibility study consultant

Loan Analytics is a limited-service restaurant feasibility study consultant that writes for the lender's side of the file: the drive-thru pad on a new outparcel, the counter-service unit in a strip center, a closed restaurant converted to a new brand, the purchase of an operating store. Between FY2017 and FY2026 SBA's files record 19,828 quick-service 7(a) approvals for $8.83 billion, at a $297,000 median, and 1,710 504 approvals for $1.28 billion, at $640,500. FY2025 brought the largest 7(a) dollar figure the class has printed, $1.23 billion on 2,584 approvals, and The Huntington National Bank alone approved 2,145 of these loans, more than any state on this page except California.

Those same files show how quick-service loans end, and every study we write starts there. Among the 7(a) quick-service loans of the FY2017 to FY2021 disbursement years, charge-offs already reach a floor of 7.6%, 4.4% within 5 years, against 0.14% for 504 loans of the same years; cancellation floors are 12.3% for 7(a) approvals and 14.2% for 504. Oklahoma prints the highest state charge-off floor, 15.3%, Texas 11.3% on the second-largest book, and Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach the highest metro floor, 15.0%. So the study goes after the operating unit first: the trips past the site in each daypart, how many cars the drive-thru lane can stack, the brands already on the corridor, the full development budget, and debt service coverage at sales a lender can accept in a bad year.

Place and program change what a lender reads. An Arizona request is set beside a $445,000 state median and 81 loans under 504, a New York request beside a $150,000 median and 1,051 7(a) loans, a Hawaii request beside $56,000. Each project is measured against the state, metro, lender and size rows below before the scope is fixed with the lender, and Daniel Smith, MAI signs the conclusion that enters the credit file, for an SBA, B&I or conventional reviewer alike.

Request Scope & Timeline

Volume, small tickets and a high loss floor

Over FY2017 to FY2026, lenders approved 19,828 quick-service restaurant loans under 7(a), totaling $8.83 billion with a median of $297,000. The 504 program added 1,710 loans and $1.28 billion at a median of $640,500, money that typically buys a pad and the building on it. Approvals under 7(a) sank to 1,352 in FY2020 and rebounded to 2,584 in FY2025, worth $1.23 billion, before settling at 1,859 in FY2026.

The gap between operating loans and property loans

Quick-service borrowers that drew 7(a) funds in fiscal 2017 through 2021 have charged off at a floor of 7.6%; 504 borrowers from the same years sit at 0.14%. Cancellation after approval is 12.3% in 7(a) and 14.2% in 504. For a lender, the contrast says the risk sits in the operating business, its sales, labor and franchise obligations, rather than in the pad, which often holds value because a well-located site can be re-let to another brand. For a borrower, it means a 7(a) request will be judged on unit-level economics and the operator's track record.

California leads with 2,752 loans and $1.32 billion, followed by Texas with 1,812 and $1.03 billion and Florida with 1,374 and $802.4 million. Georgia's 935 loans carried $538.7 million, more than New York's $379.1 million on 1,092 loans. Vermont closes the table at 29 loans and $4.7 million.

Unit economics a lender will check

The study for a quick-service unit is a sales forecast built from the site: traffic counts, daypart patterns, access and turning movements, drive-thru stacking, and the trade area's households and workers. It should benchmark the brand's average unit volumes in comparable markets where the franchisor discloses them, and map the competing quick-service units on the same corridor. Cost covers the land or ground lease, building, kitchen package, signage and the franchise's development requirements. Coverage needs to hold at a sales level below the brand average, with occupancy, royalties, the advertising fund and labor at real rates. The appraisal should separate the real estate from the franchise, and ask whether the building would serve another brand without a costly conversion.

Counter-service and drive-thru operators of every kind, branded or not, make up this class, which follows the borrower's own industry code. Full-service restaurants, coffee shops and snack bars each have a class and page of their own, and franchise lending outside SBA is not part of the record.

SBA loan record for limited-service restaurant, United States, FY2017 to FY2026

ProgramLoansDollarsMedian loanCancelled (floor)Charged off (floor)
SBA 7(a) 19,828$8.83 billion $297,000 12.3% 7.6%
SBA 504 1,710$1.28 billion $640,500 14.2% 0.14%

Download this table (CSV). Cite as: Loan Analytics, SBA loan record for limited-service restaurant, United States, FY2017 to FY2026, https://www.analytics.loan/quick-service-restaurant-feasibility-study#record-C35.

Cancellation counts FY2017 to FY2024 approvals; charge-off counts FY2017 to FY2021 disbursed loans to date. Both are floors, and a rate needs at least 30 loans in its cohort.

SBA 7(a) limited-service restaurant loans approved nationally, by fiscal year

0100020003000FY2017FY2018FY2019FY2020FY2021FY2022FY2023FY2024FY2025FY2026Loans, FY2017: 2151Loans, FY2018: 2262Loans, FY2019: 1874Loans, FY2020: 1352Loans, FY2021: 1816Loans, FY2022: 1664Loans, FY2023: 2004Loans, FY2024: 2262Loans, FY2025: 2584Loans, FY2026: 1859
Fiscal yearLoansDollars
FY20172,151$791.5 million
FY20182,262$849.7 million
FY20191,874$718.7 million
FY20201,352$587.5 million
FY20211,816$988.8 million
FY20221,664$812.9 million
FY20232,004$851.9 million
FY20242,262$1.02 billion
FY20252,584$1.23 billion
FY20261,859$971.4 million

Download this table (CSV). Cite as: Loan Analytics, SBA loan record for limited-service restaurant, United States, FY2017 to FY2026, https://www.analytics.loan/quick-service-restaurant-feasibility-study#record-C35.

SBA 504 limited-service restaurant loans approved nationally, by fiscal year

0100200300FY2017FY2018FY2019FY2020FY2021FY2022FY2023FY2024FY2025FY2026Loans, FY2017: 153Loans, FY2018: 132Loans, FY2019: 155Loans, FY2020: 147Loans, FY2021: 257Loans, FY2022: 249Loans, FY2023: 145Loans, FY2024: 147Loans, FY2025: 167Loans, FY2026: 158
Fiscal yearLoansDollars
FY2017153$83.0 million
FY2018132$83.3 million
FY2019155$99.8 million
FY2020147$104.8 million
FY2021257$178.7 million
FY2022249$183.7 million
FY2023145$127.4 million
FY2024147$120.5 million
FY2025167$147.7 million
FY2026158$147.2 million

Download this table (CSV). Cite as: Loan Analytics, SBA loan record for limited-service restaurant, United States, FY2017 to FY2026, https://www.analytics.loan/quick-service-restaurant-feasibility-study#record-C35.

States and other areas with the most limited-service restaurant loans

State or areaLoansDollars
California2,752$1.32 billion
Texas1,812$1.03 billion
Florida1,374$802.4 million
New York1,092$379.1 million
Ohio958$334.5 million
Georgia935$538.7 million
Michigan815$363.4 million
Illinois796$425.5 million
Pennsylvania760$264.6 million
Washington681$287.7 million
New Jersey674$256.8 million
Massachusetts555$168.3 million
North Carolina543$343.9 million
Indiana534$226.2 million
Minnesota524$228.2 million
Colorado462$233.5 million
Virginia429$198.9 million
Wisconsin397$187.3 million
Arizona375$232.2 million
Missouri371$183.4 million
Maryland369$140.0 million
Utah299$159.4 million
Tennessee297$158.0 million
South Carolina258$147.5 million
Oregon257$103.3 million
Nevada256$114.5 million
Alabama217$131.2 million
Connecticut205$60.8 million
Oklahoma198$80.3 million
New Hampshire187$45.4 million
Kansas176$91.0 million
Kentucky174$85.0 million
Iowa173$83.3 million
Louisiana159$100.1 million
Idaho155$73.3 million
Puerto Rico154$27.0 million
Maine117$34.9 million
Nebraska111$67.4 million
Arkansas103$51.1 million
Rhode Island98$22.9 million
Mississippi97$51.9 million
Hawaii85$25.9 million
Montana83$33.7 million
Delaware68$29.4 million
South Dakota68$36.7 million
New Mexico67$31.5 million
District of Columbia65$28.8 million
North Dakota55$21.9 million
West Virginia49$14.5 million
Alaska39$25.5 million
Vermont29$4.7 million

Download this table (CSV). Cite as: Loan Analytics, SBA loan record for limited-service restaurant, United States, FY2017 to FY2026, https://www.analytics.loan/quick-service-restaurant-feasibility-study#record-C35.

Limited-service restaurant feasibility study data by state

Limited-service restaurant feasibility study data by metro area

Source: U.S. Small Business Administration, 7(a) and 504 loan-level FOIA files (data.sba.gov), as of 2026-09-30.

SBA lending to limited-service restaurant projects, FY1991 to FY2026

Every SBA 7(a) and 504 loan approved for a limited-service restaurant project since FY1991, by fiscal year, nationally.

Where the series can be read

The early rows say more about SBA's coding than about restaurant lending. From FY1991 through FY2000 the 7(a) column is either not measured or shows a token count (1 in FY1993, 2 in FY1996, 1 in FY1997, 2 in FY1998, 4 in FY2000), and 504 records a single loan in FY2000. As the table's note explains, a year goes unmeasured when too few of its loans carry an industry code SBA's files can place. The readable series opens in FY2001 with 1,454 7(a) loans for $295.2 million and 102 loans under 504 for $35.0 million, and FY2002's dollars are withheld in both programs. Growth quoted from FY1991 would measure a data repair, not lender behaviour, so our studies date the counts from FY2001.

FY2006 to FY2009: the stress record

7(a) approvals climbed from 3,257 in FY2003 through 3,548 and 3,982 to 4,081 in FY2006, the highest count in the series, while dollars peaked among those years at $733.5 million in FY2005 and held at $729.5 million in FY2006. The count then fell to 3,582 in FY2007, 2,794 in FY2008 and 1,494 in FY2009, with dollars down to $353.9 million. Over FY2008 to FY2009, 504 hardly moved, from 182 loans and $77.5 million to 163 loans and $78.0 million. That split is the clearest stress test the class has on record: credit to the operating unit contracted sharply while property-backed lending held. A 7(a) study must show the unit carrying its debt when sales soften and credit tightens at once; a 504 study leans harder on what the pad and building are worth if the operator fails.

Fewer loans, more dollars

From FY2010 to FY2019, 7(a) approvals stayed between 1,562 (FY2012) and 2,285 (FY2016); FY2020 brought 1,352, the lowest year in the readable series; and FY2025's 2,584 was the most since FY2008's 2,794. Dollars broke away from counts: $988.8 million on 1,816 loans in FY2021, $1.02 billion on 2,262 in FY2024 and $1.23 billion in FY2025, far more than the $729.5 million that FY2006's 4,081 loans carried. The typical quick-service loan is now much larger than at the count peak, which puts more fixed debt service on each unit's sales. The revenue forecast therefore has to be evidenced from the site and the brand's disclosed results, not lifted from a franchisor's pro forma.

504 ran against the cycle again in FY2020

In the most recent downturn 504 again moved the other way. While 7(a) fell from 1,874 loans in FY2019 to 1,352 in FY2020, 504 dollars rose from $99.8 million to $104.8 million, and the program then had its strongest years for the class: 257 loans and $178.7 million in FY2021, the highest 504 count in the series, and 249 loans and $183.7 million in FY2022, the highest 504 dollar figure printed. Since then 504 has run at 145, 147, 167 and 158 loans a year, with FY2024 to FY2026 dollars between $120.5 million and $147.7 million: above any 504 year before FY2021, well under the FY2021 to FY2022 high. A study citing 504 volume as evidence of lender appetite should use the recent years, not the peak.

The FY2017 to FY2026 window

Over FY1991 to FY2026 the class totals 59,304 7(a) loans for $18.11 billion and 4,380 504 loans for $2.50 billion; everything below this section uses the FY2017 to FY2026 window instead. FY2026 closed that window at 1,859 7(a) approvals for $971.4 million, below FY2025 on both measures and exceeded in 7(a) dollars only by FY2025, FY2024 and FY2021. Current lending runs well under the counts of the mid-2000s yet at the highest dollar levels the class has seen, and a market section that reports only the dollars will not persuade a credit officer.

SBA 7(a) and 504 loans to limited-service restaurant projects by fiscal year
Fiscal yearSBA 7(a) loansSBA 7(a) dollarsSBA 504 loansSBA 504 dollars
FY1991not measurednot measurednot measurednot measured
FY1992not measurednot measurednot measurednot measured
FY19931fewer than 5 loansnot measurednot measured
FY1994not measurednot measurednot measurednot measured
FY1995not measurednot measurednot measurednot measured
FY19962fewer than 5 loansnot measurednot measured
FY19971fewer than 5 loansnot measurednot measured
FY19982fewer than 5 loansnot measurednot measured
FY1999not measurednot measurednot measurednot measured
FY20004fewer than 5 loans1fewer than 5 loans
FY20011,454$295.2 million102$35.0 million
FY20022,210withheld83withheld
FY20033,257$572.6 million139$48.5 million
FY20043,548$630.5 million164$59.7 million
FY20053,982$733.5 million176$77.6 million
FY20064,081$729.5 million200$86.0 million
FY20073,582$721.3 million202$82.5 million
FY20082,794$618.3 million182$77.5 million
FY20091,494$353.9 million163$78.0 million
FY20101,649$429.9 million196$85.7 million
FY20111,819$548.4 million191$85.6 million
FY20121,562$488.3 million209$116.4 million
FY20131,699$609.9 million160$76.3 million
FY20141,838$594.2 million168$90.1 million
FY20152,212$733.8 million146$79.7 million
FY20162,285$776.6 million188$117.3 million
FY20172,151$791.5 million153$83.0 million
FY20182,262$849.7 million132$83.3 million
FY20191,874$718.7 million155$99.8 million
FY20201,352$587.5 million147$104.8 million
FY20211,816$988.8 million257$178.7 million
FY20221,664$812.9 million249$183.7 million
FY20232,004$851.9 million145$127.4 million
FY20242,262$1.02 billion147$120.5 million
FY20252,584$1.23 billion167$147.7 million
FY20261,859$971.4 million158$147.2 million
FY1991 to FY202659,304$18.11 billion4,380$2.50 billion
FY2017 to FY202619,828$8.83 billion1,710$1.28 billion

Source: SBA 7(a) and 504 loan-level FOIA files as of 2026-09-30 (data.sba.gov; gross approvals, cancelled approvals included), aggregated by Loan Analytics; each figure is kept with its source file and retrieval date. A class figure counts the loans whose NAICS code places them in the class; in years when SBA's files leave the code missing or unplaceable for more than one loan in a hundred, the figure is a floor, and where too few loans are coded the year is not measured. Download this table (CSV). Cite as: Loan Analytics, "SBA 7(a) and 504 loans to limited-service restaurant projects by fiscal year", https://www.analytics.loan/quick-service-restaurant-feasibility-study#sba-record-sba-by-year.

Back to the contents

Every state ranked for limited-service restaurant lending

SBA loans to limited-service restaurant projects in each state from FY2017 to FY2026, ranked, with loan size, program split and the cohort floors where at least 30 loans support them.

Loans and dollars rank the states differently

California heads both columns, with 2,752 loans and $1.32 billion, and Texas is second in both, with 1,812 and $1.03 billion. Below them the rankings part company. New York has more loans than Georgia or Illinois, 1,092, but fewer dollars: $379.1 million against $538.7 million on 935 and $425.5 million on 796. North Carolina's 543 loans trail Pennsylvania, Washington, New Jersey and Massachusetts, yet its $343.9 million beats all of them and Ohio's $334.5 million on 958 loans. Arizona's 375 loans carry $232.2 million, nearly level with Colorado's $233.5 million on 462 loans and ahead of Minnesota and Indiana, which have 524 and 534. The count shows how often a state's lenders see quick-service files; the dollars show how large a project they are used to approving.

The median loan follows region

Arizona leads the state medians at $445,000, then North Carolina at $426,700, Alabama at $424,800 and Louisiana at $419,900, with Texas ($388,750), Florida ($386,900) and Georgia ($383,000) behind them. The Northeast holds the other end: New Hampshire at $133,700, Vermont at $143,000, Rhode Island at $145,000, New York and Massachusetts at $150,000, Maine at $154,000 and Connecticut at $155,400. Hawaii's $56,000 stands apart from every other state. The table does not record what the loans bought, but a $150,000 median points toward equipment, leasehold build-outs and purchases of operating units more than land and new buildings, and Arizona's $445,000 points the other way. Our study pins down what the subject actually is, because the lender will measure the request against the local norm, and a ground-up drive-thru in a low-median state will stand well above it.

Where the loss floors run high

Oklahoma prints the highest state charge-off floor, 15.3% on 198 loans; Iowa follows at 12.2% and Texas at 11.3%. Texas is the exception among the largest books: California's floor is 8.5%, Florida's 9.1%, New York's 7.4%, Ohio's 4.3%, Georgia's 5.2%, Michigan's 3.9% and Illinois's 5.9%. Texas pairs its floor with a $388,750 median, so its quick-service loans are both larger than most and lost more often. Montana (9.7%), Virginia and Connecticut (9.3% each), Massachusetts (9.1%), Kansas (8.4%) and Hawaii (8.1%) also print floors above the national 7(a) figure of 7.6%, although each state floor counts both programs. In these states the downside case is the heart of the study: sales tested below the brand's average, labor at local rates, and coverage that holds when the forecast misses.

And where they run low

New Hampshire, Nebraska and Mississippi print 0.00%, Louisiana 1.9%, Rhode Island 2.2%, Arizona and New Mexico 3.0%. A 0.00% floor is a measured result, resting on 30 or more loans in the cohort, not a missing value, yet it remains a floor, since loans from the cohort that are still repaying can still be charged off. Arizona stands out: the highest state median, one of the lowest floors, and 81 of its 375 loans under 504, more 504 loans than Georgia (76) or Michigan (63), states with far larger books. Louisiana pairs a $419,900 median with its 1.9% floor. A low state floor eases a lender's view of the class, but it says little about a single new unit's sales, and a study here should not lean on it in place of evidence from the site.

Cancellation and the program mix

Cancellation floors range from Maine's 4.2% to Arkansas's 19.8%, with Connecticut and New Mexico at 17.5% and New Jersey at 17.3%. New Jersey's matters most because of its size: 674 loans and a cancellation floor above every state that outranks it by count, while Washington, just above it with 681 loans, cancels at 7.3%. The table gives no reasons, but an untested budget or a forecast the lender later doubts is something a study can settle before approval. The program mix varies as widely. Illinois has 100 504 loans, behind only California's 183 and Florida's 156, while Maryland has 6 of its 369, Pennsylvania 24 of 760 and West Virginia none of its 49. Where 504 is rare, a project buying land and a building is likely financed under 7(a) or conventionally, and the study must carry the property analysis a 504 file would rest on.

The thin end of the table

The bottom rows carry less information than their place suggests. Wyoming's 22 loans and $11.3 million are too few for a median or any rate, and Vermont's 29 support a $143,000 median but neither floor. Delaware, South Dakota, North Dakota, West Virginia and Alaska show a cancellation floor yet leave the charge-off column unreported, their FY2017 to FY2021 cohorts being under 30 loans. With no local loss record, a study here reads the subject against the national 7(a) figures and the nearest states with a measured floor, and says plainly which comparisons are local.

SBA limited-service restaurant loans by state, FY2017 to FY2026
StateLoansDollarsMedian loanSBA 7(a) loansSBA 504 loansCancelled (floor)Charged off (floor)
California2,752$1.32 billion$310,0002,56918312.7%8.5%
Texas1,812$1.03 billion$388,7501,7209211.4%11.3%
Florida1,374$802.4 million$386,9001,21815613.2%9.1%
New York1,092$379.1 million$150,0001,0514113.7%7.4%
Ohio958$334.5 million$192,2509174110.6%4.3%
Georgia935$538.7 million$383,0008597612.8%5.2%
Michigan815$363.4 million$275,0007526314.6%3.9%
Illinois796$425.5 million$347,75069610011.9%5.9%
Pennsylvania760$264.6 million$206,7507362414.3%7.8%
Washington681$287.7 million$275,700661207.3%4.8%
New Jersey674$256.8 million$236,2506551917.3%6.9%
Massachusetts555$168.3 million$150,0004975811.5%9.1%
North Carolina543$343.9 million$426,7004935012.6%5.9%
Indiana534$226.2 million$274,7504894510.7%5.0%
Minnesota524$228.2 million$266,050446787.0%6.2%
Colorado462$233.5 million$367,8504323012.3%7.2%
Virginia429$198.9 million$300,0004072215.2%9.3%
Wisconsin397$187.3 million$304,0003425513.9%4.7%
Arizona375$232.2 million$445,0002948112.1%3.0%
Missouri371$183.4 million$319,0003323912.3%6.4%
Maryland369$140.0 million$283,000363612.4%4.9%
Utah299$159.4 million$350,0002594011.5%4.7%
Tennessee297$158.0 million$350,0002821512.3%6.5%
South Carolina258$147.5 million$352,0002382012.5%6.6%
Oregon257$103.3 million$265,0002391814.3%4.9%
Nevada256$114.5 million$350,0002362014.4%7.9%
Alabama217$131.2 million$424,8001882911.5%7.1%
Connecticut205$60.8 million$155,4001901517.5%9.3%
Oklahoma198$80.3 million$257,750190814.8%15.3%
New Hampshire187$45.4 million$133,7001573012.4%0.00%
Kansas176$91.0 million$350,000155219.0%8.4%
Kentucky174$85.0 million$284,100167711.4%5.6%
Iowa173$83.3 million$309,0001373612.3%12.2%
Louisiana159$100.1 million$419,900152713.2%1.9%
Idaho155$73.3 million$318,900138179.8%6.2%
Maine117$34.9 million$154,00099184.2%4.3%
Nebraska111$67.4 million$350,000941712.5%0.00%
Arkansas103$51.1 million$339,500911219.8%7.0%
Rhode Island98$22.9 million$145,00083159.1%2.2%
Mississippi97$51.9 million$320,00089811.7%0.00%
Hawaii85$25.9 million$56,00078713.8%8.1%
Montana83$33.7 million$275,000731013.6%9.7%
Delaware68$29.4 million$326,2506626.5%not reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
South Dakota68$36.7 million$325,90052169.8%not reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
New Mexico67$31.5 million$277,50061617.5%3.0%
North Dakota55$21.9 million$176,00041149.3%not reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
West Virginia49$14.5 million$200,00049013.2%not reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Alaska39$25.5 million$350,00037212.5%not reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Vermont29$4.7 million$143,000272not reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohortnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Wyoming22$11.3 milliontoo few loans for these measures

Source: Loan Analytics' SBA loan record from SBA's 7(a) and 504 loan-level files, approvals FY2017 to FY2026 as of 2026-09-30; rates are floors and need at least 30 loans in their cohort; dollars are not shown where fewer than five loans would reveal a single loan. Download this table (CSV). Cite as: Loan Analytics, "SBA limited-service restaurant loans by state, FY2017 to FY2026", https://www.analytics.loan/quick-service-restaurant-feasibility-study#states-states.

Back to the contents

Metro areas ranked for limited-service restaurant lending

The metropolitan and micropolitan areas with a limited-service restaurant loan record, ranked by SBA loans.

New York leads on loans, Los Angeles on dollars

No metro has more quick-service loans than New York-Newark-Jersey City, at 1,170, but Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim carries more money: $501.4 million on 1,063 loans against New York's $466.0 million, on medians of $295,400 and $200,000. Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington comes next by count at 726 loans, and its $397,850 median, larger than that of New York, Los Angeles, Chicago-Naperville-Elgin or Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, lifts its $426.9 million past Chicago's $372.2 million on 722 loans. The New York metro row counts more loans than New York State's 1,092 because it takes in New Jersey counties, so a Newark or Jersey City project is read against the metro row and New Jersey's 17.3% cancellation floor together.

The highest metro floors are in Texas and Florida

The steepest metro charge-off floors on the page belong to Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach (15.0%), Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos (14.5%), San Antonio-New Braunfels (14.0%) and Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands (13.7%), each above its state's own floor (Florida 9.1%, Texas 11.3%). Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington prints 8.9% and Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater 7.5%, so within each state the loss record differs widely by metro, and Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford (10.2%) and San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad (11.5%) also run above their states. A Texas study cannot rest on the state figure: a Houston site is read against 13.7%, a Dallas site against 8.9%. In these metros the competitive section has to plot each counter-service and drive-thru unit around the site and test the forecast against them, because that is where a lender will look for the cause of the floor.

Ohio's metros diverge

Ohio's 4.3% state floor blends very different metros. Cleveland prints 9.0% on 209 loans at a $150,000 median; Cincinnati, with 208 loans and a $324,500 median, prints 0.00%; Columbus's floor is withheld. The medians spread just as far, from $324,500 in Cincinnati and $300,000 in Dayton-Kettering-Beavercreek down to $150,000 in Cleveland and Akron, $132,150 in Toledo, $115,000 in Canton-Massillon and $50,000 in Youngstown-Warren, the lowest metro median on the page. An Ohio study is read against its own metro: a Cincinnati pad and a Youngstown counter unit share a state row and little else.

Medians peak outside the largest metros

The largest typical loans sit in mid-sized metros, many of them in Florida. Ocala prints an $800,000 median on 27 loans, then Augusta-Richmond County at $591,000, Lakeland-Winter Haven at $557,300, Pensacola-Ferry Pass-Brent at $500,000, Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville at $490,500 and Durham-Chapel Hill at $486,500. Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach ($454,300) and North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota ($435,500) also sit above Miami's $325,000 and Tampa's $350,000. Apart from Youngstown-Warren, the lowest medians gather in upstate New York and New England, with Rochester at $75,000, Worcester at $87,200 and Albany-Schenectady-Troy at $100,000. A request in a high-median metro is likely to meet a lender used to property-heavy quick-service loans, so the study must carry the land and building case; a ground-up request in a low-median metro should expect the lender to ask why it sits so far above the local book.

Withheld floors and Puerto Rico

Below the busiest metros most floors go unprinted: withheld for Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, Columbus and Las Vegas-Henderson-North Las Vegas, and not reported for Virginia Beach-Chesapeake-Norfolk and Birmingham, whose cohorts are under 30 loans. Our studies never read a withheld floor as a clean one. Phoenix shows why it matters: 261 loans, $166.4 million and a $450,000 median, higher than any metro that outranks it by count, with no printed loss rate. San Juan-Bayamón-Caguas records 117 loans and $22.1 million at a $132,000 median; Puerto Rico has a metro row here but no state row, so a study there treats the metro as its local record.

SBA limited-service restaurant loans by metro area, FY2017 to FY2026
Metro or micro areaLoansDollarsMedian loanCharged off (floor)
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ Metro Area1,170$466.0 million$200,0009.1%
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA Metro Area1,063$501.4 million$295,4008.0%
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Metro Area726$426.9 million$397,8508.9%
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN Metro Area722$372.2 million$342,0005.8%
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA Metro Area648$341.3 million$350,000withheld
Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH Metro Area452$132.4 million$150,0008.6%
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX Metro Area452$236.9 million$374,40013.7%
Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD Metro Area440$174.5 million$262,5006.1%
Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metro Area440$174.4 million$265,5004.8%
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV Metro Area439$183.3 million$300,0009.2%
Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI Metro Area388$172.1 million$270,5004.4%
Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI Metro Area378$177.1 million$277,1008.3%
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA Metro Area324$167.1 million$304,0008.1%
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA Metro Area303$141.4 million$329,0008.3%
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL Metro Area297$132.3 million$325,00015.0%
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL Metro Area264$140.0 million$350,0007.5%
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, AZ Metro Area261$166.4 million$450,000withheld
Denver-Aurora-Centennial, CO Metro Area231$126.7 million$351,0008.3%
Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL Metro Area229$127.6 million$421,00010.2%
San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad, CA Metro Area227$98.9 million$245,70011.5%
Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom, CA Metro Area213$91.4 million$325,0009.6%
Cleveland, OH Metro Area209$64.4 million$150,0009.0%
Cincinnati, OH-KY-IN Metro Area208$92.5 million$324,5000.00%
Columbus, OH Metro Area208$76.9 million$200,000withheld
Las Vegas-Henderson-North Las Vegas, NV Metro Area200$92.1 million$379,600withheld
Indianapolis-Carmel-Greenwood, IN Metro Area187$66.0 million$268,300withheld
Pittsburgh, PA Metro Area180$56.9 million$155,750withheld
Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, MD Metro Area179$66.9 million$300,000withheld
Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia, NC-SC Metro Area169$79.9 million$350,0007.6%
Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos, TX Metro Area168$96.2 million$350,00014.5%
St. Louis, MO-IL Metro Area165$83.1 million$331,0008.1%
Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA Metro Area158$66.4 million$240,000withheld
Providence-Warwick, RI-MA Metro Area143$33.0 million$150,000withheld
Kansas City, MO-KS Metro Area139$82.0 million$400,000withheld
Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro--Franklin, TN Metro Area129$59.6 million$350,000withheld
San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX Metro Area123$64.2 million$397,00014.0%
Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI Metro Area122$50.6 million$250,000withheld
Jacksonville, FL Metro Area120$80.4 million$392,000withheld
Raleigh-Cary, NC Metro Area118$67.0 million$415,5000.00%
Salt Lake City-Murray, UT Metro Area117$57.3 million$350,000withheld
San Juan-Bayamón-Caguas, PR Metro Area117$22.1 million$132,000withheld
Buffalo-Cheektowaga, NY Metro Area105$28.6 million$140,500withheld
Oklahoma City, OK Metro Area102$41.2 million$267,750withheld
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA Metro Area98$55.5 million$350,000withheld
Rochester, NY Metro Area89$16.7 million$75,000withheld
Portland-South Portland, ME Metro Area88$25.3 million$177,500withheld
Grand Rapids-Wyoming-Kentwood, MI Metro Area87$28.0 million$189,600withheld
Virginia Beach-Chesapeake-Norfolk, VA-NC Metro Area81$36.3 million$272,000not reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Boise City, ID Metro Area75$39.0 million$350,000withheld
Louisville/Jefferson County, KY-IN Metro Area73$36.2 million$267,000withheld
Birmingham, AL Metro Area71$42.1 million$465,000not reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Fresno, CA Metro Area68$27.0 million$249,950withheld
Madison, WI Metro Area68$26.0 million$290,950withheld
Colorado Springs, CO Metro Area66$35.4 million$444,250withheld
Provo-Orem-Lehi, UT Metro Area63$40.3 million$402,000withheld
Greenville-Anderson-Greer, SC Metro Area62$35.5 million$352,000withheld
Akron, OH Metro Area59$19.7 million$150,000withheld
Urban Honolulu, HI Metro Area59$21.0 million$100,000withheld
Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA Metro Area57$37.3 million$309,000withheld
North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota, FL Metro Area57$32.8 million$435,500withheld
Charleston-North Charleston, SC Metro Area55$34.0 million$449,000withheld
Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA Metro Area55$27.5 million$300,000withheld
Richmond, VA Metro Area54$29.8 million$350,000withheld
Toledo, OH Metro Area54$17.5 million$132,150withheld
Dayton-Kettering-Beavercreek, OH Metro Area53$20.9 million$300,000withheld
Memphis, TN-MS-AR Metro Area53$32.5 million$450,000withheld
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY Metro Area52$9.5 million$100,000withheld
Stockton-Lodi, CA Metro Area52$25.2 million$350,000withheld
Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach, FL Metro Area51$34.7 million$454,300withheld
Manchester-Nashua, NH Metro Area50$10.6 million$141,850not reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Bakersfield-Delano, CA Metro Area49$31.8 million$430,000withheld
Savannah, GA Metro Area48$31.3 million$355,000withheld
Tulsa, OK Metro Area48$15.5 million$242,000withheld
Wichita, KS Metro Area48$22.3 million$337,850withheld
Tucson, AZ Metro Area47$30.3 million$391,700withheld
Ogden, UT Metro Area46$23.5 million$333,100withheld
Omaha, NE-IA Metro Area45$24.1 million$392,000withheld
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ Metro Area43$18.5 million$342,000withheld
Albuquerque, NM Metro Area42$18.8 million$314,750not reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Columbia, SC Metro Area42$16.4 million$253,250withheld
Knoxville, TN Metro Area41$24.1 million$350,000withheld
Lancaster, PA Metro Area41$14.4 million$265,000withheld
Reno, NV Metro Area41$17.8 million$313,500withheld
Worcester, MA Metro Area41$7.8 million$87,200withheld
Barnstable Town, MA Metro Area40$10.5 million$150,000withheld
Fort Collins-Loveland, CO Metro Area40$12.9 million$349,950withheld
Syracuse, NY Metro Area40$10.0 million$127,500withheld
Trenton-Princeton, NJ Metro Area40$17.3 million$289,250withheld
Durham-Chapel Hill, NC Metro Area39$28.3 million$486,500withheld
Fort Wayne, IN Metro Area39$21.0 million$410,800withheld
New Orleans-Metairie, LA Metro Area39$19.3 million$300,000withheld
Springfield, MO Metro Area39$21.2 million$284,000withheld
Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL Metro Area38$32.4 million$490,500withheld
Augusta-Richmond County, GA-SC Metro Area37$25.8 million$591,000withheld
Baton Rouge, LA Metro Area37$25.5 million$391,300withheld
Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA Metro Area37$17.4 million$306,000withheld
Pensacola-Ferry Pass-Brent, FL Metro Area37$28.1 million$500,000withheld
Atlantic City-Hammonton, NJ Metro Area36$16.6 million$375,550withheld
Canton-Massillon, OH Metro Area36$10.2 million$115,000withheld
Columbia, MO Metro Area36$9.5 million$182,500withheld
Ann Arbor, MI Metro Area35$15.1 million$300,000withheld
Boulder, CO Metro Area35$13.1 million$345,000withheld
Spokane-Spokane Valley, WA Metro Area35$14.2 million$319,500withheld
Coeur d'Alene, ID Metro Area34$14.5 million$330,000withheld
Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL Metro Area33$17.1 million$350,000not reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Duluth, MN-WI Metro Area33$8.6 million$150,000withheld
Modesto, CA Metro Area33$16.6 million$462,000withheld
Port St. Lucie, FL Metro Area33$19.1 million$374,000withheld
Santa Maria-Santa Barbara, CA Metro Area33$12.2 million$216,000withheld
Wilmington, NC Metro Area33$16.4 million$350,000withheld
Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR Metro Area32$20.7 million$350,000withheld
Kiryas Joel-Poughkeepsie-Newburgh, NY Metro Area32$6.0 million$88,500withheld
Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL Metro Area32$24.7 million$557,300withheld
Lansing-East Lansing, MI Metro Area32$15.7 million$332,500withheld
Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA Metro Area32$16.4 million$387,800withheld
Sioux Falls, SD-MN Metro Area32$16.5 million$279,000withheld
Crestview-Fort Walton Beach-Destin, FL Metro Area31$13.9 million$365,000withheld
Flint, MI Metro Area31$15.3 million$300,000withheld
Evansville, IN Metro Area30$13.7 million$272,500withheld
Gainesville, GA Metro Area29$15.7 million$404,000withheld
Greensboro-High Point, NC Metro Area29$23.5 million$472,000withheld
McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX Metro Area29$10.0 million$390,000withheld
Youngstown-Warren, OH Metro Area29$7.1 million$50,000not reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway, AR Metro Area28$14.0 million$343,750withheld
Huntsville, AL Metro Area27$15.1 million$450,000withheld
Ocala, FL Metro Area27$28.2 million$800,000withheld
Olympia-Lacey-Tumwater, WA Metro Area27$13.8 million$307,000not reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Springfield, MA Metro Area27$12.8 million$200,000withheld
Winston-Salem, NC Metro Area27$20.6 million$360,000withheld
Asheville, NC Metro Area26$13.5 million$278,000withheld
El Paso, TX Metro Area26$12.6 million$342,400withheld
Green Bay, WI Metro Area25$11.6 million$340,000withheld
Jackson, MS Metro Area25$10.8 million$294,000withheld
Salinas, CA Metro Area25$14.3 million$300,000withheld

Source: Loan Analytics' SBA loan record from SBA's 7(a) and 504 loan-level files, approvals FY2017 to FY2026 as of 2026-09-30; rates are floors and need at least 30 loans in their cohort; dollars are not shown where fewer than five loans would reveal a single loan. Download this table (CSV). Cite as: Loan Analytics, "SBA limited-service restaurant loans by metro area, FY2017 to FY2026", https://www.analytics.loan/quick-service-restaurant-feasibility-study#metros-metros.

Back to the contents

SBA lenders to limited-service restaurant projects

The lenders with a recorded book of limited-service restaurant loans, ranked; no lender with fewer than 5 loans is listed.

One bank holds the count

The Huntington National Bank approved 2,145 quick-service loans for $578.5 million in FY2017 to FY2026, far ahead of the second lender by count, Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company with 559, and its charge-off floor, 6.9%, sits under the national 7(a) floor of 7.6%. Live Oak Banking Company comes close on dollars with a much smaller book: $510.8 million on 483 loans, at a 7.8% floor. The two leaders lend to the class in opposite ways, the first through volume and the second through larger loans, and both read a borrower's study against long experience of these files, expecting the site and sales questions answered rather than the brand's marketing restated.

Volume books and large-ticket books

Below the leaders the table divides along the same line. Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company ($82.2 million on 559 loans), TD Bank, National Association ($87.6 million on 501), U.S. Bank, National Association ($80.4 million on 431) and Northeast Bank (ME) ($48.2 million on 315) carry many loans and modest dollars. Byline Bank ($234.4 million on 263), Wells Fargo Bank National Association ($224.6 million on 390), Bank Five Nine ($115.2 million on 135), Banc of California ($114.1 million on 110) and First Bank of the Lake ($104.4 million on 122) carry far more per loan. A small loan is read almost wholly on the unit's cash flow; a loan of Byline Bank's or Banc of California's size will also be read on the land and the building.

Loss floors differ widely by lender

Among lenders with a printed floor, the record runs from 0.00% at Wilmington Savings Fund Society FSB and Florida Business Development Corporation to 30.5% at CDC Small Business Finance Corp. BancFirst prints 22.9%, First Bank (NC) 20.8%, Readycap Lending, LLC and BankUnited, National Association 20.0% each, Celtic Bank Corporation 14.3% and TD Bank, National Association 13.4%. KeyBank National Association, at 5.6% on 302 loans, prints a lower floor than any lender above it on the table. A lender with a high floor on its own quick-service book will press hardest on the study's downside case.

Young books and development companies

Some large books print no floor at all. Newtek Bank, National Association has 371 loans, yet fewer than 30 of them sit in the FY2017 to FY2021 cohort, so most of its quick-service loans fall outside the window that carries a measured loss rate; TowneBank (85 loans) and Lendistry SBLC, LLC (74) are in the same position. Lenders whose names mark them as development corporations show the opposite profile, smaller books of larger loans: The Mortgage Capital Development Corporation with 107 loans and $90.4 million, Florida Business Development Corporation with 93 loans, $78.4 million and a 0.00% floor, and Michigan Certified Development Corporation with 44 loans and $39.6 million. Books of that shape sit closer to the national 504 row, with its $640,500 median and 0.14% floor, than to the 7(a) book, and a 504 study for such a lender should make the property case stand on its own: the pad, the building, and whether another operator could take it over.

SBA lenders by limited-service restaurant loans approved, FY2017 to FY2026
LenderLoansDollarsCharged off (floor)
The Huntington National Bank2,145$578.5 million6.9%
Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company559$82.2 million9.9%
TD Bank, National Association501$87.6 million13.4%
Live Oak Banking Company483$510.8 million7.8%
Stearns Bank National Association434$137.1 million9.4%
U.S. Bank, National Association431$80.4 million9.0%
Wells Fargo Bank National Association390$224.6 million8.0%
Newtek Bank, National Association371$140.6 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Bank of Hope320$112.9 million7.4%
Northeast Bank (ME)315$48.2 millionwithheld
KeyBank National Association302$123.4 million5.6%
JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association269$85.6 million8.7%
Byline Bank263$234.4 million9.3%
Readycap Lending, LLC240$108.3 million20.0%
Celtic Bank Corporation224$117.4 million14.3%
PNC Bank, National Association210$86.4 millionwithheld
Citizens Bank (TN)201$99.2 million6.8%
Newtek Small Business Finance, LLC196$84.7 million7.8%
Hanmi Bank192$84.7 million8.3%
SouthState Bank, National Association183$103.9 millionwithheld
United Community Bank (SC)177$118.2 millionwithheld
Fifth Third Bank163$78.7 million8.3%
BayFirst National Bank153$38.3 millionwithheld
Bank Five Nine135$115.2 millionwithheld
Santander Bank, National Association133$22.0 million7.0%
Columbia Bank (OR)130$49.8 million9.8%
Metro City Bank127$74.2 millionwithheld
CDC Small Business Finance Corp.125$46.2 million30.5%
Gulf Coast Bank and Trust Company125$86.3 millionwithheld
Beacon Bank and Trust123$73.5 millionwithheld
PCB Bank123$46.7 millionwithheld
First Bank of the Lake122$104.4 millionwithheld
Banc of California110$114.1 millionwithheld
The Mortgage Capital Development Corporation107$90.4 millionwithheld
Wilmington Savings Fund Society FSB100$48.8 million0.00%
The Bancorp Bank National Association98$51.8 millionwithheld
Truist Bank94$41.2 million8.7%
Florida Business Development Corporation93$78.4 million0.00%
Eastern Bank90$14.4 million10.0%
Commonwealth Business Bank87$52.2 millionwithheld
Pinnacle Bank (TN)86$62.8 million12.2%
TowneBank85$50.7 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Harvest Small Business Finance, LLC85$74.8 millionwithheld
Zions Bancorporation, National Association84$41.5 millionwithheld
United Business Bank82$44.8 millionwithheld
East West Bank78$45.1 millionwithheld
First Commonwealth Bank76$35.1 millionwithheld
Ameris Bank75$45.0 millionwithheld
Open Bank75$35.3 millionwithheld
Lendistry SBLC, LLC74$16.9 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Banco Popular de Puerto Rico73$8.8 millionwithheld
Happen Bank72$50.3 millionwithheld
Bank of America, National Association71$28.2 millionwithheld
Northwest Bank (PA)70$18.2 millionwithheld
First Merchants Bank68$57.1 millionwithheld
America First Federal Credit Union68$36.4 millionwithheld
Simmons Bank66$30.5 million11.1%
First Bank (NC)65$35.8 million20.8%
BancFirst65$27.2 million22.9%
Meridian Bank65$32.8 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Florida First Capital Finance Corporation, Inc.64$74.6 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Midwest Regional Bank64$26.1 million15.0%
Granite State Economic Development Corporation62$24.0 millionwithheld
Fulton Bank, National Association62$35.1 millionwithheld
Enterprise Bank & Trust61$45.3 millionwithheld
CRF Small Business Loan Company, LLC61$19.9 millionwithheld
BMO Bank National Association60$26.2 millionwithheld
Banner Bank58$20.3 millionwithheld
Capital One National Association58$50.2 millionwithheld
First National Bank of Pennsylvania58$38.9 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
VelocitySBA, LLC58$40.3 millionwithheld
Seacoast National Bank57$29.8 millionwithheld
First Internet Bank of Indiana57$39.3 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Glacier Bank56$23.3 millionwithheld
Old National Bank54$38.7 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Prosperity Bank51$32.2 millionwithheld
Wallis Bank51$37.3 millionwithheld
WBD, Inc.50$44.3 millionwithheld
Woori America Bank50$24.0 millionwithheld
Oxford Bank50withheldwithheld
Mountain America FCU50$13.9 millionwithheld
Mountain West Small Business Finance49$40.9 millionwithheld
Renasant Bank49$32.5 millionwithheld
Hancock Whitney Bank48$27.2 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Luminate Bank48$24.5 millionwithheld
Village Bank and Trust, National Association48$19.1 millionwithheld
BankVista48withheldwithheld
Citizens Bank, National Association48$11.9 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
CenTrust Bank, A Division of SmartBiz Bank National Association48$20.9 millionwithheld
UMB Bank, National Association48$21.6 millionwithheld
Customers Bank47$19.1 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
West Coast Community Bank47$12.5 millionwithheld
ConnectOne Bank47$29.9 millionwithheld
Regions Bank46$42.8 millionwithheld
NewBank46$26.5 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Empire State Certified Development Corporation45$17.8 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
SomerCor 504, Inc.45$29.2 millionwithheld
Colony Bank45$17.8 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Michigan Certified Development Corporation44$39.6 millionwithheld
Central Pacific Bank44$2.6 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
North State Bank44$24.4 millionwithheld
Midwest Business Finance Corporation43$24.6 millionwithheld
1st Source Bank43$9.5 millionwithheld
Centerstone SBA Lending, Inc.43$31.3 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
GBC International Bank41$24.3 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
PromiseOne Bank41$23.1 millionwithheld
Small Business Growth Corporation40$33.7 millionwithheld
Centier Bank40$7.1 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Plumas Bank40$17.8 millionwithheld
Arizona Capital Source39$20.6 millionwithheld
First Interstate Bank38$24.2 millionwithheld
New Millennium Bank38$16.2 millionwithheld
US Metro Bank38$26.9 millionwithheld
German American Bank37$11.3 millionwithheld
Independence Bank37$4.3 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
BankUnited, National Association37$27.3 million20.0%
Merchants Bank of Indiana37$29.0 millionwithheld
Capital Certified Development Corporation36$28.7 millionwithheld
First-Citizens Bank & Trust Company36$22.6 millionwithheld
Frost Bank36$22.4 millionwithheld
The Bank of Princeton35$19.1 millionwithheld
California Statewide Certified Development Corporation34$20.3 millionwithheld
Rural Missouri, Inc.34$22.1 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Valley National Bank34$22.0 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
The Central Trust Bank33$6.0 millionwithheld
First National Bank of Omaha33$11.8 millionwithheld
Midland States Bank32$14.0 millionwithheld
Provident Bank32$20.7 millionwithheld
Horizon Bank32$11.7 millionwithheld
Evolve Bank and Trust31$15.2 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Five Star Bank (CA)31$10.8 millionwithheld
UniBank31$8.2 millionwithheld
LiftFund, Inc.30$16.9 millionwithheld
Business Expansion Funding Corporation29$25.2 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Community National Bank & Trust28$13.4 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
HomeTrust Bank28$23.0 millionwithheld
Shinhan Bank America28$9.1 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Capital Partners Certified Development Company27$29.8 millionwithheld
First Business Bank27$23.2 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Sunrise Banks National Association27$6.2 millionwithheld
Peoples Bank (OH)27$9.3 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Magnifi Financial CU27$8.9 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
AMPAC Tri-State CDC, Inc.26$12.9 millionwithheld
Hanover Community Bank26$19.6 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
FWBank26$22.1 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Stock Yards Bank & Trust Company25$6.4 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Heritage Bank (WA)25$16.6 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Oriental Bank25$5.3 millionwithheld
Primary Bank25$5.6 millionwithheld
Loyal Trust Bank25$13.0 millionnot reported: fewer than 30 loans in the cohort
Rockland Trust Company25$5.6 millionwithheld

Source: Loan Analytics' SBA loan record from SBA's 7(a) and 504 loan-level files, approvals FY2017 to FY2026 as of 2026-09-30; rates are floors and need at least 30 loans in their cohort; dollars are not shown where fewer than five loans would reveal a single loan. Download this table (CSV). Cite as: Loan Analytics, "SBA lenders by limited-service restaurant loans approved, FY2017 to FY2026", https://www.analytics.loan/quick-service-restaurant-feasibility-study#lenders-lenders.

Back to the contents

Loan sizes, program split and cohort floors for limited-service restaurant loans

How large limited-service restaurant loans run under each SBA program, how they fall into size bands, and how often they were cancelled or charged off.

Two programs, two kinds of loan

Under 7(a) the lower quartile of quick-service loans is $101,975, the median $297,000 and the upper quartile $515,000; under 504 those points are $343,250, $640,500 and $1.0 million. Each program's middle range barely reaches the other's: the 7(a) median falls short of 504's lower quartile, the 504 median clears 7(a)'s upper quartile, and the two interquartile ranges share only the stretch from $343,250 to $515,000. The programs finance different projects: a 7(a) request at $515,000 already sits at its program's upper quartile; under 504 the same amount would sit below the median.

Where the 7(a) count and the 7(a) money sit

By count the largest 7(a) band holds the smallest loans: 6,750 of $150,000 or less, carrying $482.6 million, the fewest dollars of any occupied 7(a) band. The band running from above $350,000 to a million dollars holds 6,089 loans and $3.52 billion, the most money in the program. Higher up, 577 loans in the top occupied band carry $1.72 billion, a shade more than the 1,214 loans in the band beneath ($1.71 billion) and more than the 5,198 loans between $150,000 and $350,000 ($1.39 billion). The table's highest band is empty in both programs. Quick-service 7(a) is two books in one: many small loans whose size fits equipment, leaseholds or purchases better than new construction, and a short list of large loans carrying an outsized share of the money. The study should say which book the subject belongs to.

The 504 book leans to larger bands

The 504 book is weighted the other way. In the band running from above $350,000 to a million dollars it has 804 loans and $518.0 million, and in the band above that 416 loans whose $550.5 million is the program's largest dollar total by band. Only 103 504 loans are $150,000 or less, for $12.0 million, and 44 reach the top occupied band, for $108.7 million. A 504 request near the $640,500 median sits in the program's busiest band; a larger one joins a smaller group that nonetheless holds more money. The study for such a loan should test whether the building would suit another operator.

Cancelled more, charged off less

Against 7(a), 504 approvals show the higher cancellation floor, 14.2% to 12.3%, and the far lower charge-off floor, 0.14% to 7.6%. Cancellation covers approvals from FY2017 to FY2024 and charge-off loans disbursed from FY2017 to FY2021, and both are minimums. Property-backed quick-service projects, then, fall away between approval and funding more often than operating loans do. The table gives no reasons, but the usual weak points of a building project (a budget that grows, a site that cannot be delivered, a schedule that slips) are questions a study can settle before approval rather than after.

Charge-offs after the fifth year

The 7(a) charge-off floor is 7.6% to date but 4.4% within 5 years; for 504 both measures are 0.14%. Since the cohort was disbursed in FY2017 to FY2021, the gap means a substantial share of the 7(a) charge-offs were recorded after the fifth year of the loan. A quick-service unit that clears its opening years can still fail later, when a new store's novelty fades, a remodel falls due or a competitor opens across the street. A study that proves coverage only through the ramp-up answers the wrong question for this class; it has to show the unit holding its sales in the years after opening.

SBA limited-service restaurant loans by program, FY2017 to FY2026
ProgramLoansDollarsLower quartileMedian loanUpper quartileCancelled (floor)Charged off (floor)Charged off within 5 years
SBA 7(a)19,828$8.83 billion$101,975$297,000$515,00012.3%7.6%4.4%
SBA 5041,710$1.28 billion$343,250$640,500$1.0 million14.2%0.14%0.14%

Source: Loan Analytics' SBA loan record from SBA's 7(a) and 504 loan-level files, approvals FY2017 to FY2026 as of 2026-09-30; rates are floors and need at least 30 loans in their cohort; dollars are not shown where fewer than five loans would reveal a single loan. Download this table (CSV). Cite as: Loan Analytics, "SBA limited-service restaurant loans by program, FY2017 to FY2026", https://www.analytics.loan/quick-service-restaurant-feasibility-study#loan-sizes-programs.

SBA limited-service restaurant loans by size band, FY2017 to FY2026 approvals
Loan sizeSBA 7(a) loansSBA 7(a) dollarsSBA 504 loansSBA 504 dollars
$150,000 or less6,750$482.6 million103$12.0 million
Over $150,000 to $350,0005,198$1.39 billion343$87.2 million
Over $350,000 to $1 million6,089$3.52 billion804$518.0 million
Over $1 million to $2 million1,214$1.71 billion416$550.5 million
Over $2 million to $5 million577$1.72 billion44$108.7 million
Over $5 million0$00$0

Source: SBA 7(a) and 504 loan-level FOIA files as of 2026-09-30 (data.sba.gov; gross approvals, cancelled approvals included), aggregated by Loan Analytics; each figure is kept with its source file and retrieval date. Download this table (CSV). Cite as: Loan Analytics, "SBA limited-service restaurant loans by size band, FY2017 to FY2026 approvals", https://www.analytics.loan/quick-service-restaurant-feasibility-study#loan-sizes-size-bands.

Back to the contents

Questions buyers ask

Who prepares the feasibility study behind a quick-service restaurant loan?

Someone with no stake in the deal. Loan Analytics writes limited-service restaurant studies for lenders under either SBA program, under a USDA guarantee or on conventional terms, with Daniel Smith, MAI signing the conclusion. The study places the subject inside the record this page prints, 19,828 7(a) and 1,710 504 quick-service loans over FY2017 to FY2026, then in its state and metro rows and, where listed, its lender's own book. It builds the unit's sales from the site and its competition and tests whether the loan still services at sales below the brand's average.

Does SBA always require a feasibility study for a fast-food restaurant?

No. In the SOP wording carried by our 2026 fee survey on this site, SBA has discretion to request one when it needs a better grasp of a business type and the market at the location, and the first circumstance on its list is saturation by industry type and location. Fast-food units invite that question, since they compete for the same trips on the same roads. Lenders' own policies can also require one, usually for start-ups or special-purpose property. This record gives them cause: quick-service 7(a) loans carry a 7.6% charge-off floor nationally and 15.3% in Oklahoma.

How much does a quick-service restaurant feasibility study cost?

Price ranges are what providers publish, and Loan Analytics gathered them for 2026 in the fee survey posted here. Restaurants and franchise units fall in its standard tier, $5,000 to $12,500 when the SBA study covers a single location; several locations, a concept without precedent or a build delivered in stages lift a project into the complex tier, whose range is $10,000 to $25,000; and USDA assignments written to 7 CFR Part 5001 have a separate band, from $7,500 to beyond $18,750. SBA itself sets no fee and no ceiling, the survey notes. Our quote arrives with the scope once the request form describes the project.

How long will a drive-thru restaurant study take?

The timeline follows the scope, and our reply to the scope request sets it against the lender's own deadline. What lengthens the work, according to this site's 2026 fee survey: added sites; ground-up construction, with its budget review and a ramp counted from opening; a franchise projection that must be tested against how the brand's other units perform; a USDA overlay; and rural trade areas so thin that each competitor must be seen in person. A single drive-thru pad on a suburban corridor sits at the simple end, a development program spread over several metros at the other. It also has to land before the appraisal goes stale.

What does the lender examine in a quick-service restaurant study?

Whether the unit's sales will carry the debt with room to spare. That starts with a forecast built from the location: vehicle counts by daypart, ingress and egress, the queue the drive-thru can hold, and the residents and daytime workers within reach, set against the brand's disclosed unit volumes and every competing counter-service unit nearby. Then the cost side, from land or lease through building, kitchen and signage to the franchisor's build standards. Then coverage, with royalties, advertising contributions, occupancy and labor at market rates, run at sales under the brand's average, the test a lender facing a 7.6% national 7(a) floor reads first.

Which banks are most active in SBA quick-service restaurant lending?

The Huntington National Bank leads by a wide margin, with 2,145 loans and $578.5 million in FY2017 to FY2026, followed by Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company (559), TD Bank, National Association (501), Live Oak Banking Company (483) and Stearns Bank National Association (434). By dollars, Live Oak Banking Company is second to The Huntington National Bank at $510.8 million, with Byline Bank ($234.4 million) and Wells Fargo Bank National Association ($224.6 million) next. Only lenders with 5 or more loans in the class appear on the table.

Which states have the most SBA quick-service restaurant lending?

California, at 2,752 loans and $1.32 billion over FY2017 to FY2026, ahead of Texas at 1,812 loans and $1.03 billion, Florida at 1,374 and $802.4 million, and New York at 1,092 loans and $379.1 million. Georgia ($538.7 million) and Illinois ($425.5 million) both have fewer loans than New York but more dollars. Among metros, the count leader is New York-Newark-Jersey City (1,170) and the dollar leader Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim ($501.4 million).

Which SBA program suits a quick-service restaurant project, 7(a) or 504?

The class leans heavily on 7(a): 19,828 loans over FY2017 to FY2026 against 1,710 under 504. 504 loans are larger, with a $640,500 median and a $343,250 lower quartile against $297,000 and $101,975 under 7(a), and 504 money usually goes into the land and the building. 504 approvals are cancelled more often, 14.2% against 12.3%, but charge off far less, 0.14% against 7.6%. The answer turns on what the loan pays for and on the lender's appetite; we write the study to the program the lender uses, and for 504 the property analysis is complete rather than summarised.

What size SBA loan does a fast-food restaurant usually get?

Nationally the 7(a) median is $297,000, with quartiles at $101,975 and $515,000, and the 504 median is $640,500, with quartiles at $343,250 and $1.0 million. Location moves those figures a long way. State medians run from Hawaii's $56,000 and New Hampshire's $133,700 up to North Carolina's $426,700 and Arizona's $445,000, and metro medians from $50,000 in Youngstown-Warren to $800,000 in Ocala. In 7(a), the most loans, 6,750, sit at $150,000 or less.

How often do SBA quick-service restaurant loans charge off?

This page measures charge-offs as floors on loans disbursed in FY2017 to FY2021. For 7(a) the floor is 7.6% to date and 4.4% within 5 years; for 504 it is 0.14% on both measures. State floors range from 0.00% (New Hampshire, Nebraska, Mississippi) to 15.3% (Oklahoma); metro floors from 0.00% (Cincinnati, Raleigh-Cary) to 15.0% (Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach); lender floors from 0.00% to 30.5%. Each is a minimum, because loans from those years that are still repaying can yet be charged off.

Is a franchise quick-service study different from one for an independent concept?

The tests are the same; the evidence differs. For a franchise unit the study benchmarks the projection against the brand's disclosed unit volumes and puts royalties, the advertising contribution and the brand's development requirements into the budget and the coverage test. An independent concept has no system results to lean on, so its forecast rests wholly on the site, the trade area and the competing units. The SBA record on this page counts both under the borrower's industry code, with no franchise flag, so the study draws that line from the brand's own disclosures and from fieldwork.

Does the lender care whether another brand could use the building?

Yes, and the record shows why. 504 quick-service loans, which usually finance the property, carry a charge-off floor of 0.14%, against 7.6% for 7(a). That gap suggests the class's credit risk lives in the operating unit more than in the real estate, and the real estate's strength depends partly on a site another operator could take over. The study and the appraisal should keep the property and the franchised business apart, and price what it would take to refit the building for a different concept, since a drive-thru lane, a kitchen layout or a brand-specific facade can help or hinder a re-let.

Why are quick-service loans so small in New York and New England?

The table shows the pattern but not its cause. New York and Massachusetts lend at a $150,000 median, Connecticut at $155,400, Rhode Island at $145,000 and New Hampshire at $133,700, while Rochester prints $75,000 and Worcester $87,200. Smaller loans fit leased storefronts, equipment and purchases of operating units better than land and new buildings, but a study has to establish the format from the project itself. A ground-up drive-thru in one of these markets will sit far above its local median, and the lender will ask why.

Are lenders still financing quick-service restaurants?

Yes, at close to record dollars. 7(a) approved 2,584 quick-service loans for $1.23 billion in FY2025, the largest dollar figure the series prints, and 1,859 for $971.4 million in FY2026; 504 approved 167 and 158 in those years, for $147.7 million and $147.2 million. These newest loans have no loss record yet, since the charge-off floors measure FY2017 to FY2021 disbursements only. The same series shows 7(a) approvals falling from 4,081 in FY2006 to 1,494 in FY2009, and a study should show how the unit fares if lending turns that way again.

Why do some rows on this page show 'withheld' or 'not reported'?

'Not reported' means the cohort behind a rate holds fewer than 30 loans. Delaware, South Dakota, North Dakota, West Virginia, Alaska and Vermont show it in the charge-off column, and so does Newtek Bank, National Association despite its 371 loans. 'Withheld' marks a value this page keeps back, such as the floors for Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell and Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler or the dollar totals for Oxford Bank and BankVista. Neither means zero, and a Loan Analytics study gives neither a number. The Wyoming row, 22 loans marked too few for these measures, shows no median or rate at all.

Can the same study support a USDA B&I loan or a conventional loan?

Yes. The same method serves a B&I guarantee or a bank lending with no guarantee at all. For the USDA case, the fee survey on this site prices a 7 CFR Part 5001 study separately, at $7,500 up to $18,750 and higher, because that rule spells out its own components and factors. Because every loan counted here is SBA-guaranteed, a USDA or conventional file uses the state, metro and size-band rows as context for how comparable units have been sized, while the market case itself comes from the site.

Do coffee shops or table-service restaurants count in these figures?

No. Membership in this class comes from the borrower's own industry code, which covers counter-service and drive-thru operators with or without a brand. Coffee shops and snack bars, and table-service restaurants, sit in separate classes with separate pages on this site, and franchise loans made without an SBA guarantee are absent altogether. A fast-casual concept between counter and table service should say which class its comparisons come from, because the lender will set the request against that class's record.

Back to the contents

Loan Analytics prepares the feasibility study a lender reads before it commits: for a limited-service restaurant project anywhere in the United States, financed under SBA 7(a), SBA 504, USDA Business and Industry or a conventional bank loan. Tell us the project and the lender's deadline, and we reply with scope, timeline and fee.

Request Scope & Timeline

Start with the data.

Contact Us